arXiv:2607. 02995v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models can exhibit visual concept-conditioned divergence: given images containing demographic features, corporate logos, or ideological symbols, some models produce unusually uniform responses that differ from what peer models say about the same input.
arXiv:2606. 31407v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models can produce confident answers on visually ambiguous inputs, resulting in biased predictions.
Vision-Language Large Models (VLLMs) trained on massive crawled corpora raise pressing copyright and data-provenance concerns. These concerns are particularly acute in healthcare, where patient medical images paired with clinical reports demand rigorous privacy safeguards.
DiaVLo is a diagnostic framework for vision‑language models (VLMs) that uses human curation and VLM generation to create specifications of desired and observed behaviours, revealing potential misalignments. It also offers causal estimates to pinpoint the most influential concepts driving VLM behaviour. Experiments on several open‑source VLMs under classification and generation tasks show that DiaVLo’s behaviour labels correlate with model performance and illuminate how VLMs perceive, organise, and prioritise concepts.
The paper presents the first systematic reliability evaluation of diffusion-based Large Vision‑Language Models (dLVLMs), comparing six diffusion models to autoregressive (AR) baselines across four dimensions. Key findings include a reversal of the yes‑bias seen in AR models for binary visual queries, competitive hallucination rates but lower linguistic quality, near‑zero accuracy for underrepresented racial groups with opposite‑polarity gender bias, and accuracy collapse in multiple‑choice tasks when the correct option is shorter than distractors due to a length prior emerging at the first denoising step. Additionally, tokens committed late in denoising with low confidence correlate with hallucinated content, indicating a unique mechanistic signal in diffusion generation.
arXiv:2602.06652v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The robustness of Vision Language Models (VLMs) is commonly assessed through output-level invariance, implicitly assuming that stable predictions r...
arXiv:2503. 08884v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Unimodal vision models are known to rely on spurious correlations, but it remains unclear to what extent Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit similar biases despite language supervision.
arXiv:2503. 11832v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent vision language models (VLMs) have made remarkable strides in generative modeling with multimodal inputs, particularly text and images.
arXiv:2512. 21815v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) achieve remarkable performance but remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks.
arXiv:2607. 03365v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly read news and web content as images, where the publisher's identity is visually present.
arXiv:2609.00231v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing research on object hallucination in multimodal large language models (MLLMs) predominantly attributes the problem to language priors such as o...
arXiv:2606. 22437v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We conduct a systematic study of 18 widely used vision-language benchmarks and identify three major issues: 1) many items do not rely on visual cues and therefore fail to effectively measure multimodal understanding; 2) many items are already close to performance saturation for current LVLMs, which limits their discriminative power; 3) a small number of anomalous items affect the reliability of evaluation results.
arXiv:2603. 21693v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have shown strong potential for medical Visual Question Answering (VQA), yet they remain prone to hallucinations, defined as generating responses that contradict the input image, posing serious risks in clinical settings.